Design and Implementation of the All of Us Research Program COVID-19 Participant Experience (COPE) Survey.

In response to the rapidly evolving coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the All of Us Research Program longitudinal cohort study developed the COVID-19 Participant Experience (COPE) survey to better understand the pandemic experiences and health impacts of COVID-19 on diverse populations within the United States. Six survey versions were deployed between May 2020 and March 2021, covering mental health, loneliness, activity, substance use, and discrimination, as well as COVID-19 symptoms, testing, treatment, and vaccination. A total of 104,910 All of Us Research Program participants, of whom over 73% were from communities traditionally underrepresented in biomedical research, completed 275,201 surveys; 9,693 completed all 6 surveys. Response rates varied widely among demographic groups and were lower among participants from certain racial and ethnic minority populations, participants with low income or educational attainment, and participants with a Spanish language preference. Survey modifications improved participant response rates between the first and last surveys (13.9% to 16.1%, P < 0.001). This paper describes a data set with longitudinal COVID-19 survey data in a large, diverse population that will enable researchers to address important questions related to the pandemic, a data set that is of additional scientific value when combined with the program's other data sources.

The eMERGE genotype set of 83,717 subjects imputed to ~40 million variants genome wide and association with the herpes zoster medical record phenotype.

The Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE) network is a network of medical centers with electronic medical records linked to existing biorepository samples for genomic discovery and genomic medicine research. The network sought to unify the genetic results from 78 Illumina and Affymetrix genotype array batches from 12 contributing medical centers for joint association analysis of 83,717 human participants. In this report, we describe the imputation of eMERGE results and methods to create the unified imputed merged set of genome-wide variant genotype data. We imputed the data using the Michigan Imputation Server, which provides a missing single-nucleotide variant genotype imputation service using the minimac3 imputation algorithm with the Haplotype Reference Consortium genotype reference set. We describe the quality control and filtering steps used in the generation of this data set and suggest generalizable quality thresholds for imputation and phenotype association studies. To test the merged imputed genotype set, we replicated a previously reported chromosome 6 HLA-B herpes zoster (shingles) association and discovered a novel zoster-associated loci in an epigenetic binding site near the terminus of chromosome 3 (3p29).

Development of the Initial Surveys for the All of Us Research Program.

BACKGROUND: The All of Us Research Program is building a national longitudinal cohort and collecting data from multiple information sources (e.g., biospecimens, electronic health records, and mobile/wearable technologies) to advance precision medicine. Participant-provided information, collected via surveys, will complement and augment these information sources. We report the process used to develop and refine the initial three surveys for this program. METHODS: The All of Us survey development process included: (1) prioritization of domains for scientific needs, (2) examination of existing validated instruments, (3) content creation, (4) evaluation and refinement via cognitive interviews and online testing, (5) content review by key stakeholders, and (6) launch in the All of Us electronic participant portal. All content was translated into Spanish. RESULTS: We conducted cognitive interviews in English and Spanish with 169 participants, and 573 individuals completed online testing. Feedback led to over 40 item content changes. Lessons learned included: (1) validated survey instruments performed well in diverse populations reflective of All of Us; (2) parallel evaluation of multiple languages can ensure optimal survey deployment; (3) recruitment challenges in diverse populations required multiple strategies; and (4) key stakeholders improved integration of surveys into larger Program context. CONCLUSIONS: This efficient, iterative process led to successful testing, refinement, and launch of three All of Us surveys. Reuse of All of Us surveys, available at http://researchallofus.org, may facilitate large consortia targeting diverse populations in English and Spanish to capture participant-provided information to supplement other data, such as genetic, physical measurements, or data from electronic health records.

Importance of missingness in baseline variables: A case study of the All of Us Research Program.

OBJECTIVE: The All of Us Research Program collects data from multiple information sources, including health surveys, to build a national longitudinal research repository that researchers can use to advance precision medicine. Missing survey responses pose challenges to study conclusions. We describe missingness in All of Us baseline surveys. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We extracted survey responses between May 31, 2017, to September 30, 2020. Missing percentages for groups historically underrepresented in biomedical research were compared to represented groups. Associations of missing percentages with age, health literacy score, and survey completion date were evaluated. We used negative binomial regression to evaluate participant characteristics on the number of missed questions out of the total eligible questions for each participant. RESULTS: The dataset analyzed contained data for 334,183 participants who submitted at least one baseline survey. Almost all (97.0%) of the participants completed all baseline surveys, and only 541 (0.2%) participants skipped all questions in at least one of the baseline surveys. The median skip rate was 5.0% of the questions, with an interquartile range (IQR) of 2.5% to 7.9%. Historically underrepresented groups were associated with higher missingness (incidence rate ratio (IRR) [95% CI]: 1.26 [1.25, 1.27] for Black/African American compared to White). Missing percentages were similar by survey completion date, participant age, and health literacy score. Skipping specific questions were associated with higher missingness (IRRs [95% CI]: 1.39 [1.38, 1.40] for skipping income, 1.92 [1.89, 1.95] for skipping education, 2.19 [2.09-2.30] for skipping sexual and gender questions). CONCLUSION: Surveys in the All of Us Research Program will form an essential component of the data researchers can use to perform their analyses. Missingness was low in All of Us baseline surveys, but group differences exist. Additional statistical methods and careful analysis of surveys could help mitigate challenges to the validity of conclusions.

The All of Us Data and Research Center: Creating a Secure, Scalable, and Sustainable Ecosystem for Biomedical Research.

The All of Us Research Program's Data and Research Center (DRC) was established to help acquire, curate, and provide access to one of the world's largest and most diverse datasets for precision medicine research. Already, over 500,000 participants are enrolled in All of Us, 80% of whom are underrepresented in biomedical research, and data are being analyzed by a community of over 2,300 researchers. The DRC created this thriving data ecosystem by collaborating with engaged participants, innovative program partners, and empowered researchers. In this review, we first describe how the DRC is organized to meet the needs of this broad group of stakeholders. We then outline guiding principles, common challenges, and innovative approaches used to build the All of Us data ecosystem. Finally, we share lessons learned to help others navigate important decisions and trade-offs in building a modern biomedical data platform.

Comparing medical history data derived from electronic health records and survey answers in the All of Us Research Program.

OBJECTIVE: A participant's medical history is important in clinical research and can be captured from electronic health records (EHRs) and self-reported surveys. Both can be incomplete, EHR due to documentation gaps or lack of interoperability and surveys due to recall bias or limited health literacy. This analysis compares medical history collected in the All of Us Research Program through both surveys and EHRs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The All of Us medical history survey includes self-report questionnaire that asks about diagnoses to over 150 medical conditions organized into 12 disease categories. In each category, we identified the 3 most and least frequent self-reported diagnoses and retrieved their analogues from EHRs. We calculated agreement scores and extracted participant demographic characteristics for each comparison set. RESULTS: The 4th All of Us dataset release includes data from 314 994 participants; 28.3% of whom completed medical history surveys, and 65.5% of whom had EHR data. Hearing and vision category within the survey had the highest number of responses, but the second lowest positive agreement with the EHR (0.21). The Infectious disease category had the lowest positive agreement (0.12). Cancer conditions had the highest positive agreement (0.45) between the 2 data sources. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Our study quantified the agreement of medical history between 2 sources-EHRs and self-reported surveys. Conditions that are usually undocumented in EHRs had low agreement scores, demonstrating that survey data can supplement EHR data. Disagreement between EHR and survey can help identify possible missing records and guide researchers to adjust for biases.

Diversity and inclusion for the All of Us research program: A scoping review.

The All of Us Research Program (All of Us) is a national effort to accelerate health research by exploring the relationship between lifestyle, environment, and genetics. It is set to become one of the largest research efforts in U.S. history, aiming to build a national resource of data from at least one million participants. All of Us aims to address the need for more diversity in research and set the stage for that diversity to be leveraged in precision medicine research to come. This paper describes how the program assessed demographic characteristics of participants who have enrolled in other U.S. biomedical research cohorts to better understand which groups are traditionally represented or underrepresented in biomedical research. We 1) reviewed the enrollment characteristics of national cohort studies like All of Us, and 2) surveyed the literature, focusing on key diversity categories essential to the program's enrollment aims. Based on these efforts, All of Us emphasizes enrollment of racial and ethnic minorities, and has formally designated the following additional groups as historically underrepresented: individuals-with inadequate access to medical care; under the age of 18 or over 65; with an annual household income at or below 200% of the federal poverty level; who have a cognitive or physical disability; have less than a high school education or equivalent; are intersex; identify as a sexual or gender minority; or live in rural or non-metropolitan areas. Research accounting for wider demographic variability is critical. Only by ensuring diversity and by addressing the very barriers that limit it, can we position All of Us to better understand and tackle health disparities.

Understanding What Information Is Valued By Research Participants, And Why.

There is growing public demand that research participants receive all of their results, regardless of whether clinical action is indicated. Instead of the standard practice of returning only actionable results, we propose a reconceptualization called "return of value" to encompass the varied ways in which research participants value specific results and more general information they receive beyond actionable results. Our proposal is supported by a national survey of a diverse sample, which found that receiving research results would be valuable to most (78.5 percent) and would make them more likely to trust researchers (70.3 percent). Respondents highly valued results revealing genetic effects on medication response and predicting disease risk, as well as information about nearby clinical trials and updates on how their data were used. The information most valued varied by education, race/ethnicity, and age. Policies are needed to enable return of information in ways that recognize participants' differing informational needs and values.

The CTSA Consortium's Catalog of Assets for Translational and Clinical Health Research (CATCHR).

The 61 CTSA Consortium sites are home to valuable programs and infrastructure supporting translational science and all are charged with ensuring that such investments translate quickly to improved clinical care. Catalog of Assets for Translational and Clinical Health Research (CATCHR) is the Consortium's effort to collect and make available information on programs and resources to maximize efficiency and facilitate collaborations. By capturing information on a broad range of assets supporting the entire clinical and translational research spectrum, CATCHR aims to provide the necessary infrastructure and processes to establish and maintain an open-access, searchable database of consortium resources to support multisite clinical and translational research studies. Data are collected using rigorous, defined methods, with the resulting information made visible through an integrated, searchable Web-based tool. Additional easy-to-use Web tools assist resource owners in validating and updating resource information over time. In this paper, we discuss the design and scope of the project, data collection methods, current results, and future plans for development and sustainability. With increasing pressure on research programs to avoid redundancy, CATCHR aims to make available information on programs and core facilities to maximize efficient use of resources.